Hintz v. Farmers Co-op Assn.
297 Neb. 903
Neb.2017Background
- On Nov. 13, 2014, Ian Hintz was at work when a semitrailer tire exploded; he was thrown ~10 feet, landed on his back, experienced temporary lower-extremity numbness and hip/groin pain, left work, and returned the following Monday. He did not seek immediate medical care after the work incident.
- On Dec. 4, 2014, Hintz tripped on home stairs, hit his hip, and then sought medical treatment; MRIs revealed a severe right hip labral tear and he underwent hip arthroscopy and labral repair in Feb. 2015.
- Hintz initially told treating physicians his painful right-hip symptoms began with the Dec. 4 stair fall; only after his March 2015 termination did he assert his symptoms dated to the Nov. 13 workplace explosion.
- Medical opinions conflicted: Dr. Harris (surgeon) thought the labral tear was more consistent with a high-energy work injury; Dr. Gallentine said causation could be either event; Dr. Bozarth (employer’s reviewer) concluded the work injury resolved and the Dec. fall caused the symptomatic right-hip injury.
- The Workers’ Compensation Court credited evidence that Hintz recovered from the work event within days and that the Dec. fall caused the operative hip injury; it denied benefits. The Court of Appeals reversed, but the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the compensation court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Hintz) | Defendant's Argument (Farmers) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Causation: did Nov. 13 workplace accident proximately cause the operative right-hip injury? | The work explosion caused ongoing hip pathology culminating in surgery. | The workplace injury resolved within days; the Dec. 4 stair fall caused the symptomatic labral tear. | Court upheld compensation court: insufficient proof that the Nov. 13 event caused the later disabling hip injury. |
| Weight of conflicting expert opinions | Rely on surgeon Harris’s opinion (based on intraoperative findings) that suggests work-related mechanism. | Court may credit Bozarth and other evidence showing resolution and later new injury; trier of fact decides weight. | Proven principle: trier of fact may accept or reject experts; compensation court’s credibility choices were not clearly erroneous. |
| Competency of record-review expert testimony (Bozarth) | Bozarth’s record-review opinion insufficiently medical to be competent. | A physician may base admissible diagnosis/opinion on other practitioners’ exams/records; Bozarth’s review is competent. | Supreme Court: Bozarth’s opinion was competent evidence; Court of Appeals erred to exclude it on that ground. |
| Standard of review on appeal | Appellate court should remand for reconsideration and apply liberal construction for claimants. | Appellate court must view evidence in light most favorable to the successful party and not reweigh credibility. | Nebraska Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeals for reweighing evidence and applied clear-error standard in favor of Workers’ Comp Court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nichols v. Fairway Bldg. Prods., 294 Neb. 657, 884 N.W.2d 124 (appellate standard for Workers’ Compensation Court decisions)
- Hynes v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 291 Neb. 757, 869 N.W.2d 78 (physician reliance on other practitioners’ exams may be admissible)
- Owen v. American Hydraulics, 258 Neb. 881, 606 N.W.2d 470 (conflicting medical testimony—trier of fact resolves credibility)
- Hamer v. Henry, 215 Neb. 805, 341 N.W.2d 322 (trier of fact not bound by experts)
- Mathes v. City of Omaha, 254 Neb. 269, 576 N.W.2d 181 (definition of competent evidence)
- Hohnstein v. W.C. Frank, 237 Neb. 974, 468 N.W.2d 597 (when expert knowledge required)
- State v. Earl, 252 Neb. 127, 560 N.W.2d 491 (trial court’s role in determining competency of a witness)
- Hull v. Aetna Ins. Co., 247 Neb. 713, 529 N.W.2d 783 (general standards for causation and expert proof in compensation claims)